Dívida alimentícia: uma análise sobre a persistência da violação ao direito à alimentação

Abstract

The Federal Constitution and the Child and Adolescent Statute (ECA) guarantee comprehensive protection for those who are absolutely incapacitated, making it the responsibility of the family, society, and the State to guarantee the realization of this right. Among the instruments aimed at preserving a dignified life for children and adolescents, child support occupies a central position, as it is intended to meet basic and urgent needs. Nevertheless, repeated failure to pay child support is a recurring problem in modern family relationships, constituting a true violation of the fundamental right of those receiving support to subsistence, even in cases where the most powerful instrument of Jus puniendi, civil imprisonment for debt, can be or is effectively applied against the debtor. This paper aims to reflect on the persistence of child support debt in light of its social and legal context, which resists even the most powerful means of enforcement: civil imprisonment for non-payment. To this end, this qualitative, bibliographical, and documentary research examined sentence enforcement proceedings in the 3rd Mixed Court of Santa Rita, Paraíba, highlighting three symbolic cases. The criteria for procedural recidivism and civil imprisonment were considered, allowing for monitoring of the history of default and judicial action. The cases were analyzed in three separate chapters, whose central themes are the repercussions of default on the family context, as well as significant social aspects of relationships. The concluding remarks concluded that the persistence of the problem involves structural factors, such as the fragility of family ties, gender inequality, and socioeconomic vulnerability. These aspects go beyond the procedural sphere, limiting the effectiveness of civil imprisonment for debt. While it compels immediate payment, it is incapable of breaking the cycle of default.